Have they no sense of honor? (Small Update)

I was reading through the various blogs I link to, when I found this on Noble Duty:


Not a single elected official from New York is going to attend the launching of this vessel?  Not one current or former official from the 9-11 days is going?  What are these people thinking?

Rudy has begged off.  Pataki said no.  Spitzer said no.  Joe Bruno and Shelly Silver passed.  What about Peter King?  Or Charlie Rangel?  No, and no.  Bloomberg?  A definite maybe.  Representatives from the NYPD, NYFD, and Port Authority will be there, but none of our elected officials.

This one bears a little digging to find out why none of these people will make the one day trip to Mississippi to christen the new vessel.  With 7 tons of steel recovered from Ground Zero at the WTC in it’s prow, one would think the USS New York would have more meaning than what the politicians are giving it. 

I’ll have to fire off a series of emails to as many as I can contact, and see what sort of responses I get, if any.


One NY politician attended the event.  US Rep. Vito Fosella (R) attended and spoke.

I have yet to receive any responses from the emails I sent out.


9 thoughts on “Have they no sense of honor? (Small Update)

  1. I think 9-11 has been beaten so much by everyone, that no one really cares anymore. Besides, New York is New York and most Americans outside of the 5 boroughs, Long Island and the Lower Hudson Valley really wouldn’t care if NYC broke off drifted off into the Atlantic and sunk to the bottom of the ocean.

    As a nation we tend to get all emotional over everything, every school shooting, every police shooting etc. 9-11 was similar on a larger scale. That’s life, its sad for awhile, but then life goes on. Continually dwelling on the past isn’t going to help anything.

    It’s funny that the political right is so quick to bring up 9-11 and how we must honor and respect the victims and their families, yet it was the repulican leaders, Rudy, Pataki, Bush who have done such as piss poor job in keeping benefits to the families of the Police and Firefighters who lost their lives that day. But then again, you are all about saving a buck and staying away from socialism. As someone who’s familiy is losing their health insurance, I thank you all.

  2. Very interesting to see the political spin machine in action in the above comment. The summary of that commentary is: The hell with 9-1-1, I’m losing health insurance.

    I doubt that claim. The comment has the mark of the political shill. Political buzzwords contained therein tell the tale.

    The fact is: Liberals (Rudy, et. al) do not want the country reminded of 9-1-1. It’s a loser for them. They want to change the debate to health insurance.

    The facts challenge the health insurance argument.
    All health care providers are required to render treatment to a patient whether or not you have health insurance.

    Returning to the topic, let’s hope John McCain puts in an appearance. It’s a perfect opportunity for a qualified Navyman and the next President of the United States.

    Al Czervic, Editor
    The Catskill Commentator

  3. Sure hospitals are required to treat regardless of your health insurance, but the money has to come from somewhere… Either the hospitals have to write off the costs or the state has to pay. I find it funny that conservative such as yourself would be in favor of the uninsured getting treatment, after all that’s what keeps you bitching about your taxes being so high…

    But if we hadn’t spent billions are a useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we could have give quality health insurance to every man woman and child in this country for years. With the economy tanking, that is why McCain will ulitmately lose the election. When the poor get worried, they vote. Give them health insurance and make sure their basic needs are met and they tend not to rock the boat, piss them off and their will be a Democrat in the White House for better or worse.

  4. The numbers don’t add up. Go to factcheck.org and look up health care costs. The costs for both Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn’t cover the costs for 1 year of “universal health care.” It’s a fallacy, one that gets a lot of air play because it sounds good, but isn’t reality. And it will take far more than just “universal health care” to get the system fixed. Just look at what’s happening in Britain, Germany, France, and Canada. Patient stacking, 6-8 hour emergency room waiting periods, need an appointment with your GP, wait 2-3 YEARS, specialized care, go to the USA or South Africa.

    It’s all about bread and circuses. Keep em fed, keep em entertained, and they won’t notice what gets taken away from them. You know, things like free speach (politically correct speach is the worst affront), the Second Amendment, making discrimination acceptable (as long as it’s either “in the name of public health,” or you happen to be a white male, in which case you have no protections like every other group out there), or any other nanny state program.

    Of course, this is just another nail in the coffin of personal responsibility. I mean, why do for yourself what the government can hand to you on a plate (even if it is rotten), and become totally dependent upon them? Why work at all? Uncle Sugar will be there to give you all the hand outs you want.

  5. Socialized Medicine is not the answer to our medical cost problems. There would be a huge population that would be denied life saving procedures strictly because they are too old due to the criteria that would need to be set. I am talking about the age group of people over 50. Age is a major factor in who gets surgical procedures and who does not in countries that practice socialized medicine. A 25 year old crack addict has a better shot at a heart transplant than a person over 50 whose diet was not the greatest. Socialized medicine also stagnates research into new and improved techniques. The grant moneys to fund such endevors will all be earmarked to pay for the astronomical costs of substandard care. There would also be an amount taken out of everyone’s paycheck, like taxes and FICA already are, to help pay for the costs as well. I am more in favor of going back to the way it was before time of copays. You paid upfront for medical care (and prescriptions) and submitted for reimbursement from the insurance company. This system kept the prices lower from the drug companies and hospitals because no one could afford the pricetags the insurance companies have allowed for years. It would also cut down on the amount of fraudulant charges facilities charge insurance companies for things that were never even done but are allowed to be done for certain procedures. An example of this would be when it was popular for hospitals to charge insurance companies for speech therapy after tonsilectomies because people where allowed this following the surgery if they needed it. People didn’t check their bills because the insurance companies paid them. So, the hospitals got away with it for years. Now, I realize that hospital costs are absolutely insane and this method would probably never be able to make them a reasonable price. This could be done however for presciption medications. When people paid for the medications out of pocket and got reimbursed by the insurances it kept the manufacturers prices low. No one is going to shell out over $100 for a ten day supply of their latest and greatest antibiotic. Insurance companies used to allow for only 20 to 30% of their costs going out to paying for medications. They now spend at least 60%. If we could get even this one small fraction of healthcare under control we might have a shot at making insurance affordable to the masses.

  6. At no point was I advocating for a system such as in the UK or Canada, they are flawed and too expensive. I am personally in favor of a private system, in which by law employers are required to offer health insurance to all their employees, with the amount an employee pays based on wage. I would then allow the companies to write off employee health costs and recoup the money in taxes. Ultimately a version of this idea is what I think will happen. Massachusetts had the right idea in making everyone get health insurance, but forcing people to pay 100% out of pocket for it was wrong.

    And Josh, what is my incentive to work now? If I work harder, make more money, do I get health insurance? No! In fact I lose it. With my daughter (who would also lose her benefits) listed as disabled, the costs would be overwhelming for her services. If to avoid getting $1,000’s of dollars in bills a month means working one less day or one less job to keep her services, I will do it. The way the current system works, punishs those who try to climb out of it.

    The problem with most conservatives is that they tend to look down upon people when it comes to health care. They view most people on Medicaid as ‘freeloaders’ or ‘lazy’. That is not the case. Sure there are people who work the system, there will always be people who work the system (CEO’s do it on their taxes), but a lot of people are hard working, my wife works two jobs over 6 days a week often and I work full time at another. NONE of our jobs offer health insurance and with the economy tanking, the prospects of finding another job is bleak. And yes we are college educated with a least a 2 year degree. So where else am I going to turn?

  7. I hate to say this but there is nothing in it for them. There is no paid speech for rudy and and no publicity of political connection or any other kind of advantageous event for any of them. For get patriotism or pride in America; let alone remembering the victims of 9/11, how soon we forget when the press and cameras aren’t around and there is nothing political to be gained. So sad but true. It is a disgrace and people should remember this kind of thing at election time or when they are trying to garner support for something that is advantageous for them. BTW welcome aboard if I haven’t said it yet.

  8. My hope is that the commissioning, which will take place in NYC will have a bigger draw. I will admit that this is not the greatest of events, but one would think that those who had championed this effort (Pataki, Rudy, Bloomberg, et al), would have made something of an effort, or at least gien a valid reason why not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s